Jesus in the Quran

Right now I've completed 21 of the 30 juzes in my Ramadan reading of the Quran. I've covered a few mentions of Jesus so far and I truthfully can't remember if there are any others in the remainder. In any case, everything I've read so far and everything that I recall of Jesus in the Quran is just when he is an infant or talking of his illusioned crucifiction.

What struck me as odd was something I read in the surah Maryam. In verse 33, baby Jesus states:

"So Peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)!"

What I find strange about this is the fact that the Muslim view of Jesus states that he did not die but was raised to heaven (actually, on further investigation, it turns out this is even disputed in Islam). I would think that Jesus, being a prophet, wouldn't talk of his death if it were not actually going to happen.

As usual of late, my lack of time limits the length of my post so that's all for now.

More Law

I feel like law, Jewish, sharia, or other, is a topic that comes up way too much on this site. Law is not the spirit of a religion but simply a result of it. If everyone were to follow the spirit perfectly, the law would be unnecessary. If there were no theft, murder, adultury, greed, jealousy, or hate, there would be no need for laws. I should be addressing the spirit underlying the different religions. However, as all religions have basically the same intentions and I'm not trying to differentiate between goals but between authenticity, I have to analyze what I can. Since much of the Bible addresses law, I'll analyze it. I'll just save spirit for another day.

Jesus said:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished (Matthew 5:17-18).

This quote, more than any other that comes to mind at the moment, worries me. If Jesus did not come to change the law then why don't Christians adhere to the stricter set of laws followed by Judaism? I've heard and read that Jesus' sacrifice fulfilled the "until everything is accomplished" clause of the above quote but that seems to completely ignore the "until heaven and earth disappear" clause. It seems to me from the current state of the Earth that there is still much to be accomplished. I could easily accept that Jesus' second coming with accomplish all that there is to be accomplished. He will raise the dead, separate good from evil, and bring about God's kingdom here on Earth. At that point, all will be living in God's paradisial utopia where there is no law because no law is necessary. Everyone loves and respects each other and praises God perfectly. At that point, not only is Jesus' job complete but the current heaven and earth will have disappeared to be replaced by the new Eden.

It would be more convincing if Jesus had, after his resurrection, then begun ignoring the Mosaic laws but I know no mention of Jesus or his disciples doing so until later when the apostles began preaching to the Gentiles who did not follow Judaic law. I suppose it could be argued that Jesus had not completed his task at the time of the resurrection and did not do so until his ascension. However, the fact that the Mosaic laws held firm until conversion of the Gentiles began makes me question the validity of throwing away the Mosaic laws.

This didn't stop me from eating our Christmas ham this week. As I said, unless I convert, I'm sticking with Christianity, which means I drink wine and eat ham. However, these thoughts and questions are floating around my head through any of these questionable activities.

Christmastime

Now that Christmas season is upon us, I'm having recurrences of guilt about my exploration of Islam. I feel like I'm betraying Jesus, whom I've come to love deeply throughout my life. From the earliest years of my life I'd been attending Sunday school, singing "Jesus Loves Me," celebrating his birth, mourning his death, and rejoicing at his resurrection. He's been my Lord and Redeemer and I kind of feel like I'm just dropping him for the new guy.

Obviously, there's no need to feel guilty if Jesus was actually the Muslim version of Jesus rather than the Christian version. If Jesus was only a prophet and not the earthly incarnation of God, then as God's prophet he wouldn't want to be worshiped. This, of course, brings us back to the root of the problem... was Jesus simply a prophet or was Jesus the Son of God, sacrificed for our sins, resurrected on the third day?

Even though Easter is the most important holiday in Christianity, Christmas is always the season that most reminds me of Christianity. Although Christmas has been overly commercialized and many people go through the Christmas season without ever giving a thought to the reason for the holiday, the decorations, food, and music are a constant reminder to those who are conscious of the reason. The rest of the year it's easy to lose sight of God. Most of society is secular and one has to work to keep God in focus. During Lent it's a little easier because fasting is a constant reminder; I'm sure Ramadan is the same. However, during Christmas, secular society hangs out all sorts of reminders of God and Jesus.

More important than the community traditions are my family traditions, which are probably pretty common among American families. What makes them important is that they are my best memories. As a child, I spent my everyday with my immediate family but the holidays were also spent with my extended family, which made them special. We'd get dressed up, have nice meals, go to candlelight vesper services at church, and gather together to open presents and play games. Now, that my siblings and I are adults and scattered around the country, the holidays are one of the few times I see my family each year and I just keep adding to my best memories. Without Christmas, I wouldn't have any special time with my family. I could still visit but the chances of all of us being together at once is slim without a special occasion as a catalyst. Even if it did happen, the magic of Christmas would be missing.

Truthfully, without family, this whole process would be much easier. It's not that my friends won't question me; I wouldn't be surprised if a few are absolutely horrified. However, I don't hold them on the same level as my family. I've gained and lost friends in the past but one can't just make new family. My parents brought me into this world and raised me. They made me who I am and gave me so so much. Growing up with my siblings, they were always my closest friends. Of course we fought plenty but now they're my closest friends.

However, my relationship with God comes above my relationship with anyone else so, if it comes to that, it's a sacrifice I'll have to make.

Busy

I've got a lot going on right now with upcoming deadlines and such. As a result, I haven't had much time to write but I still read most every day. Aside from my usual reading of the Bible and the Quran, I've also been reading this article about Catholicism, Christianity, Jesus, and the Bible that was recommended to me by in a recent reply to one of my posts.

I primarily didn't want people to think I had abandoned this site; I'll be back and writing again soon, hopefully.

More Confusion?

I feel like I'm often very pro-Islam for some reason. I've justified it in the past with the excuse that my Christian upbringing leads me to read primarily about Islam as that's where my knowledge is most lacking. However, after my last post, I realized that I need to apply the same criticism to Islam as to Christianity. In particular, my argument about the Trinity being complex and mysterious and my desire to believe that God wouldn't ask us to accept anything too terribly confusing.

If you're unfamiliar with Islam's story of Jesus, I'll give a brief, hopefully accurate but definitely incomplete, summary. Islam, like Christianity, believes that Mary was approached by the archangel Gabriel and informed of her virgin pregnancy. Mary she left town to give birth in the wilderness under a date tree and was made unable to speak about her pregnancy and birth upon returning to town with the baby Jesus. Since his mother was unable to defend herself against accusations of unchastity, the baby Jesus miraculously spoke and defended her, which then broke the seal on his mother's lips. His miraculous conception and birth, however, did not make him a deity any more than Adam, Eve, or Melchizedek are deities although they were created by God without father or mother.

Jesus' mission, according to Islam, is very similar to his mission according to Christianity. He wandered through Israel and Judea performing miracles and teaching the Gospel. However, this was done as a prophet of God rather than as Son of God. Islam (as a majority, although this also states a different viewpoint) does not believe that Jesus was crucified but was simply made to look crucified, either through being replaced by a look-a-like or else by simply fainting on the cross and then waking in the tomb. Most Muslims believe that Jesus was taken up to heaven by God while still alive and will again come, just as in Christianity, at the end of days to establish Islam as the world's religion and abolish all others.

Until just now when reading the differing viewpoints of Jesus within Islam, I had only been aware of the theory where Jesus was replaced with another man made to look like him. This is the point I wanted to refute as confusing. Why would God make it look like Jesus was crucified if we are all supposed to believe otherwise? It would be one thing if only the Romans and his Jewish enemies were convinced of his death but his followers and even his mother witnessed and believed his death.

Of course, now as I write my argument, I'm finding holes. If Jesus didn't claim to be the son of God, it wouldn't matter if he died or not. Whether Jesus the prophet died on the cross or not, he still spent his life teaching God's word and performing miracles in His name. Whether Jesus the prophet was raised to Heaven while still alive or he died a natural death beforehand, he still spent his life teaching God's word and performing miracles in His name. Jesus' crucifixion only really matters if Jesus is not just a prophet but God's Son, sent to pay for the sins of the world through his suffering on the cross and his following internment in Hell before being raised on the third day.

I definitely agree with the arguments that Jesus' staged death is tricky and not very consistent with my impression of God. However, as I stated in the last paragraph, I don't know if it matters much unless it is a central facet of your religion. If Jesus hasn't been crucified but had died a natural death, couldn't he still be deified? Indeed, many religions don't even wait for someone to die before declaring them as gods; for instance, the Dalai Lama or all the many kings and rulers who were worshipped as gods (in the literal sense) by all their subordinates.

I guess I didn't have any revelations in today's post. Oh well, you can't find enlightenment everyday.

Intellect, the Bible, and the Quran

One of the things I really like about Islamic culture is the intellectual nature of it. The fact that Mohammad's first revelation was "Read!" is indicative of that nature. My understanding is that every Muslim is supposed to read the entire Quran during the month of Ramadan. Additionally, Quranic memorization is a common occurrence and there is even a well-developed science to reading the Quran.

This stands in stark contrast to much of Christianity, where many people never read the Bible and indeed for centuries only the clergy and well educated had access to Bibles. Although the Roman Catholic church insisted on keeping mass in Latin for centuries, it made no effort to educate people in Latin. It wasn't until relatively recently that colloquial translations of the Bible were made.

Islam is similar in its sticking to Arabic but it stresses learning and reading Arabic for all Muslims, not just the clergy and affluent. In this way, religion has a place in the lives of everyday, common man rather than just those with the money and time to pursue such studies.

This intellectual side is also evident in the Quran, which states that one should understand and not simply blindly follow what you're told. I very much respect this questioning of religion as blind acceptance of anything is dangerous, in my opinion. I feel like if you're going to believe something and follow something, whether it's religious, political, or scientific, you should be able to logically explain your belief. Blind acceptance without question leads to fascism in government and extremist cults in religion. I don't claim that Islam is without this blind acceptance or that Christianity is without intellectualism; I just appreciate how it seems to be a central facet to Islam.

Anyway, after I started my questioning of everything, my regular reading of my Bible changed drastically. I began noticing many little things that didn't quite make sense. One of these oddities was Jesus' praying to God. I couldn't figure out why Jesus, as a part of God through the Trinity, would need to pray. I can accept him leading prayer amongst others but his individual prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane doesn't make any sense to me. As a part of God, it seems to me that he's praying to himself. Is he asking himself for intervention or blessing?

I asked my Pastor this question and I wasn't terribly pleased with the response. I was told that it is part of the mystery that is God. The question was actually reflected back to me: how would I, as a believer, explain it to a non-believer? It actually makes me think of the movie Contact where the scientists state that the simple solution is most probably fact, Occam's razor. It's much more natural to accept a god that's clearly understandable and plainly laid out. The whole "mystery of God" thing is fairly unappealing. I don't claim that God must be entirely comprehensible to man but if God wants man to worship and follow him, I think he would clarify important issues such as these.

Another thing that I noticed while reading, although the Quran this time, was the mention of the Holy Spirit. In sura Baqara, 2:87, "We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit." I also noticed it later on in the same sura but I didn't write down which ayah. I also should've noted the Arabic word that was translated to Holy Spirit. What surprised me was the fact that it was captalized, especially given its meaning in Christianity. I can understand the Quran referencing the spirit as a characteristic of God but the "Holy Spirit" has a well-defined meaning in the mind of Christians. For this reason alone, I would expect the translator to avoid that phrase, especially capitalized as it is.

Anyway, my reading of both the Bible and the Quran continue. We'll see what I pick up on next.

Islamic Law

I received an email response to my blog entry that addressed Jesus' peaceful teachings versus Mohammad's occasionally unpeaceful teaching. The response pointed out that along with the different messages, the men had very different roles in society. Whereas Jesus was only a preacher, Mohammad was a community leader. In this respect, it would be much more fair to compare Mohammad to Moses or Joshua than to Jesus. When that comparison is made, Mohammad comes out to be the the more peaceful of the group. Whereas Islam's spread permitted the conquered inhabitants to remain in their land and even retain their religion, the Israelites conquering the Promised Land drove out and killed all previous inhabitants. Even this comparison, however, is unfair as Islam's conquests were not aimed at procuring land but at expanding the empire and, in some cases*, to spread Islam.

In any case, blanket statements calling Jesus peaceful and Mohammad violent would be far from accurate. Jesus' teachings address personal behavior whereas Muhammad addresses all aspects of life just as the Jewish law does.

Since I seem to be retracting previous statements, I guess this would be a good time to confess my lack of understanding of the various levels of Islamic code. I've heard of some things being Sunnah, which means that they're not mentioned in the Quran but they were stated by Muhammad. Because of this, they're apparently not mandated but are strongly suggested since the Quran does say to obey the teachings of Muhammad. There are also laws that are fiqh, which are interpretations and rulings. The Quran and Sunnah are immutable whereas the fiqh are interpretations of the Quran and Sunnah to address topics not explicitly covered. An analogy can be made in which the Constitution (if we imagine that there's no possibility of amendments) is like the Quran and Sunnah and the rulings of the Supreme Court are like the fiqh.

I'm not terribly sure what belongs to the different classes or what comprises Sharia. Wikipedia claims that sharia technically consists only of the revealed law, code in the Quran and Sunnah, whereas fiqh does not qualify. However, it also states that in many cases, fiqh is wrongly considered part of sharia law. In the one brief conversation I've had with a Muslim friend, it turned out we were both wrong and confused so I won't hold it against others who also make mistakes.

Anyway, I'm now even less sure what Islam says about different things and into which category the various things I've heard fall. I guess that is just more incentive for me to read and gather my own information rather than relying on other (possibly faulty) sources.

I have more things scribbled down about which to write but it'll have to wait for another day.

Mohammed versus Jesus

First of all, I noticed that I just spelled Muhammad as Mohammed instead. I've seen both used and I don't know when or why I use one versus the other. I guess I'll just use whichever pops into my head when I'm writing. Such is transliteration.

Although in general, Jesus, Mohammed, and all the prophets teach primarily the same thing, there are a few topics in which their teachings seem to differ greatly. This is especially true of Jesus' teachings as Muhammad's line up fairly well with the Old Testament prophets. This is fine if justified with the "new covenant" argument of Christianity that states that Jesus came bringing a new message of grace and forgiveness, to abolish the old law and establish a new one in which belief in him and living a Christian life are the new requirements for eternal life. However, if one sticks to the Muslim argument that all the prophets' teachings were consistent but were simply modified, Jesus' teachings have to be drastically altered to attain consistency.

Whereas Jesus taught to turn the other cheek when someone strikes you (Luke 6:27-36), Mohammed allowed and even encouraged violence at times. Although Christianity has a long history of violent mission work bringing about forced conversion, that is not a product of Jesus' teachings but, rather, the corruption of power and ethnocentrism resulting from Christianity's dominance in the Western world. The early church spread and grew not through violence but simplly through personal evangelism and the faith and conviction demonstrated through martyrdom.

I suppose the same progression happened with Islam but on a much faster time-scale. Since it happened during the life of Mohammed, it definitely can't be argued that it was a result of corruption of his teachings and Islamic beliefs. It can easily be argued, on the other hand, that Christianity's violent turn was against Christ's teachings.

The warring against unbelievers under the direction of Mohammed does draw definite parallels to Israel's history. The entire book of Joshua in the Old Testament follows Israel's entry into the promised land across the Jordan River after forty years of wandering through the desert. Under Joshua's guidance, they invade city after city, killing almost everyone and claiming the land and its wealth.

I can accept that some corruption of Jesus' message happened but that seems like a major difference. They were in very different situations, Jesus having a small following within Judaism for a short time span as opposed to Mohammed having a large following over a much longer span. However, I can't imagine Jesus would teach only lessons applicable to the immediate situation and ignore the future, growing church.

I'm currently finishing up a collection of ahadith (sayings and teachings of Mohammed that were not part of the divinely given Quran). Most of the teachings are commonsense, habits to help you lead a good life, keep good relations with others, and maintain one's health. Some of them do strike me as somewhat specific to the Arab culture, as I've already mentioned, not having any practical grounding, but most of them would probably be accepted as guidelines for any religion, Eastern or Western, mono- or poly- (or even a-)theistic. There were a few that almost offended me as a Christian; I wish I had marked them of written them down. I feel like most of them have to do with relations with non-Muslims. Whereas Christianity (at least I feel) teaches one to love, honor, and respect everyone regardless of creed, Islam has a very different official position regarding non-believers, especially non-Judeo-Christians.

That strikes me as odd because Islam is not an exclusive religion into which you have to be born. People convert (or revert, in the Islamic lingo) to Islam all the time. Muslims are expected to spread Islam to non-believers. I just don't understand how that's supposed to happen when there is a mandated separation between Muslims and non-Muslims.

I don't experience this in my everday dealings with Muslims. I've always found them to be friendly and accepting of me, even before I had developed even the slightest curiosity about Islam. However, the ahadith teaches that separation from (and even slaughter of) non-believers. I'm sure I'm being a bit harsh. I'll try to pull up a couple examples of the ahadith that bug me.